I'd like to see a "just search" engine, all it does it search for a specific string, case insensitively, across the entire web. No curation or anything, just sorted in lexicological order closest match first maybe falling back to page age if it has more then one exact match. Perhaps give me some regular expressions as well.
Ask HN: Why doesn't anyone create a search engine comparable to 2005 Google?
151–160 of 492 posts
Re: Ask HN: Why doesn't anyone create a search engine comparable to 2005 Google?
#152Natural Language Processing is a pox on modern search engines. I suspect that Google et. al. wanted to transform their product into an answer engine that powers voice assistants like Siri and just assumed everyone would naturally like the new way better. I can't stand how Google is always trying to guess what I want, rather than simply returning non-personalized results solely based on exactly what I typed in the tex…
I doubt they assumed it was better. I expect they did a ton of user testing and found that it was better for most people. And I'm sure it is. HN users are very much a niche audience these days.
Re: Ask HN: Why doesn't anyone create a search engine comparable to 2005 Google?
#153Re: Ask HN: Why doesn't anyone create a search engine comparable to 2005 Google?
#154I'm probably the only person who doesn't think Google search has deteriorated. I play security CTFs, so a lot of times I have to search for peculiar technical details on various software. Also, like any other human being, I also make generic queries. In both cases, I feel like I almost always get to the desired webpage within the top few results.
Re: Ask HN: Why doesn't anyone create a search engine comparable to 2005 Google?
#155Earlier quoted context omitted.
Trusted curators is a dangerous dependency
Plus, it scales less well than pure algorithmic search. This fight already happened, with a much smaller internet.
It works really, really well for libraries. Research libraries (and research librarians) are phenomenally valuable. I've missed them any time I'm not at a university.
Both curators and algorithms are valuable. This goes for finding books, for finding facts and figures, for finding clothes, for finding dishwashers, and for pretty much everything else.
I love the fact that I have search engines and online shopping, but that shouldn't displace libraries and brick-and-mortar. Curation and the ability to talk to a person are complementary to the algorithmic approach.
Re: Ask HN: Why doesn't anyone create a search engine comparable to 2005 Google?
#156Natural Language Processing is a pox on modern search engines. I suspect that Google et. al. wanted to transform their product into an answer engine that powers voice assistants like Siri and just assumed everyone would naturally like the new way better. I can't stand how Google is always trying to guess what I want, rather than simply returning non-personalized results solely based on exactly what I typed in the tex…
What’s a pox?
a disease or plague
Re: Ask HN: Why doesn't anyone create a search engine comparable to 2005 Google?
#157Why don't you want personalized results? If I search for "subaru service" I want to find Austin Subaru, not Thorp Subaru in Cape Town.
I pretty much hate "personalized" search recommendations. If i'm looking for something it's usually not in relation to me but in relation to the world. If i wanted something more relevant to me, then i would specify what aspect of relevance (country, gender, age etc...) i would like instead of playing the guessing game.
> If i'm looking for something it's usually not in relation to me but in relation to the world.
If that's true, then I don't think you are a typical search engine user.
The personalization should just be used for defaults. You can always make a more specific query to focus on aspects you are interested in.
Re: Ask HN: Why doesn't anyone create a search engine comparable to 2005 Google?
#158Ha, yes, I've done that at https://gigablast.com/ . The biggest problems now are the following: 1) Too hard to spider the web. Gatekeeper companies like Cloudflare (owned in part by Google) and Cloudfront make it really difficult for upstart search engines to download web pages. 2) Hardware costs are too high. It's much more expensive now to build a large index (50B+ pages) to be competitive. I believe my algorithms…
Where did you read that google/alphabet owns part of Cloudflare?
[deleted]
Re: Ask HN: Why doesn't anyone create a search engine comparable to 2005 Google?
#159Re: Ask HN: Why doesn't anyone create a search engine comparable to 2005 Google?
#160Earlier quoted context omitted.
Bitcoin and DeFi don't have utility outside of gambling and pump and dumps. Not everything (tbh not really anything) needs crypto.
Read Bitcoin whitepaper. Bitcoin was meant to decentralize trust and to eradicate fraud through transparent decentralized database called Blockchain. It is certainly more impactful than hobby search engines taking in consideration Bitcoin was also hobby project but really revolutionary one. Go search what Larry Page said 20 years ago: If innovation is commercially successful it can have more widespread impact.
The bitcoin brainworms do bad things to people.
I suggest you update your patter some, though. A good coin scam needs to sound a lot less dated.